The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

Profile: FROSTY X RIME
About
User Name: FROSTY X RIME
Forum Rank: Advanced Member
Occupation:
Interests:
Gender: None Specified
Home Page
Statistics
Joined: Tuesday, October 20, 2015
Last Visit: Monday, December 10, 2018 11:39:12 AM
Number of Posts: 1,017
[0.11% of all post / 0.88 posts per day]
Avatar
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: None of them has/Have...
Posted: Friday, November 23, 2018 7:23:25 PM
It takes either.

What should be shall be-The fellowship of the ring-
Topic: Is the word "whence" still used in modern English? is it a formal word? What about " from whence"?
Posted: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 10:31:00 AM
I have not seen it in modern literature but I can't tell you for sure because my knowledge is not perfect so you may as well wait for others' say regarding the matter.

I copied and pasted the usage note of "from whence" from TDF as below:

Usage Note: The construction from whence has been criticized as redundant since the 1700s. It is true that whence incorporates the sense of from: a remote village, whence little news reached the wider world. But from whence has been used steadily by reputable writers since the 1300s, among them Shakespeare, John Milton, Jane Austen, and the translators of the King James Bible: "I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help" (Psalms). Such a respectable precedent makes it difficult to label the construction, which is fairly rare and very formal in any case, as incorrect.

What should be shall be-The fellowship of the ring-
Topic: Evil companions bring more hurt than profit.
Posted: Thursday, November 15, 2018 10:05:23 AM
monamagda wrote:

The Sick Stag - An Aesop's Fable
Moral of Aesops Fable: "Evil companions bring more hurt than profit."

The Sick Stag Fable
An Aesop's Fable
With a Moral


A sick Stag lay down in a quiet corner of his pasture-ground.

His companions came in great numbers to inquire after his health, and each one helped himself to a share of the food which had been placed for his use; so that he died, not from his sickness, but from the failure of the means of living.


http://www.taleswithmorals.com/the-sick-stag.htm







That's a terrible thing to happen to the stag.
Thank you for sharing the story with us, Monamagda.

What should be shall be-The fellowship of the ring-
Topic: Low windows
Posted: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 12:04:09 PM
Windows that are set down low. Contrary to this, high windows should be windows that are set up high.
For example, low windows would come down to a driver's chest level whilst high windows would come down to his eye level.

[high windows]



[low windows]







What should be shall be-The fellowship of the ring-
Topic: comma
Posted: Thursday, November 8, 2018 4:58:18 PM
I should correct my own sentence.
It should be "I won't take heed of FounDit's advice on this occasion."

What should be shall be-The fellowship of the ring-
Topic: comma
Posted: Thursday, November 8, 2018 1:47:40 PM
I will not take a heed of FounDit's advice on this occasion.

The comma is placed in the right place in the original sentence.

Refer to the link below:

Comma in such as



What should be shall be-The fellowship of the ring-
Topic: 'You'll get me killed.' Vs. 'You'll get me be killed.' (causative verbs)
Posted: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 6:56:10 PM
Dragon wrote this:

I got it done => I got someone to do it (cheat). ('Someone' includes myself.)

I will highlight "('someone') includes myself".

Job Done here. ^^



What should be shall be-The fellowship of the ring-
Topic: 'You'll get me killed.' Vs. 'You'll get me be killed.' (causative verbs)
Posted: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 6:40:59 AM
The sentence "X get me be killed," is wrong grammatically.
It should be "X get me to be killed," because the verb "get" takes "to infinitive" after an object.
When it is written in that way, it means the same as "X get me killed."

What should be shall be-The fellowship of the ring-
Topic: It is the same with man as with the tree ... The more he seeketh to rise into the height and light, the more vigorously do...
Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2018 10:47:32 AM
I agree with pi. I was thinking the same as he/she did.
Why did the author drag the trees' names in the mud.

What should be shall be-The fellowship of the ring-
Topic: Ing
Posted: Wednesday, October 10, 2018 10:39:29 AM
BobShilling wrote:
BobShilling wrote:
John drives far too fast. He's going to have an accident one day


FROSTY X RIME wrote:
"be going to" has some other function than "determination or intention". That is "prediction".

Fine, but the prediction is based on the present evidence we have that Bob drives too fast. That is why, in this case, the present progressive is not appropriate.

By the way, I see that the page you linked us to contains these words (my emphasis added):

Be going to is used when we want to emphasise our decision or the evidence in the present:

[An ‘A’ road is a main road. A ‘B’ road is a smaller road.]

We are now very late so we’re going to take the ‘B’ road
. (the speaker refers to the present and emphasises the decision)

I know the ‘B’ road will be quicker at this time of day. (the speaker states a fact)


In both the examples, the speaker's decision is based on evidence - the knowledge that the B road will be quicker.
[/quote]

Hello BobShilling,

Regarding the evidence thing you have been mentioning, of course there must be evidence for an assumption or prediction. It's a natural process of thinking to come to a prediction.

I think we are discussing the issue whether there is a difference between "be going to" and "present continuous". Whilst many others argue there is no difference between those two, some do think there is a difference. I do not know where your pointing-out the evidence things is heading for in connection with the difference between the two. What is your exact intention of bringing it up?

Having evidence to make a statement does not lead to anywhere. Why is that? According to some peole's belief there is a difference between the two, when you say, "we are going to have a party tomorrow", you are declaring that you have determined to have a party tomorrow or you are intending to . It does not necessary mean you have evident to support your decision. One day you just woke up and came up with an idea and said that and then after that, you would start preparing for a party-sending out invitations or going shopping to buy stuff you will need-, which was to be evidence to your later declaration, "I am having party tomorrow." If I have gotten it right, "We are going to have a party tomorrow," precedes "I am having party tomorrow."

In short, when you say, "we are going to have a party tomorrow," you do not have to have evidence to state it but you just need your determination/intention only whilst when you say "it's going to rain tomorrow" or "you are so clumsy. you are going to break the vase someday," or "John drives far too fast. He's going to have an accident one day," you have some sort of evidence to state them.

If those two "be going to" and "present continuous" are the exactly same things, they should be interchangeable but they are not.
For example, you would never hear anybody saying, "It's raining tomorrow," or "John drives far too fast. He's having an accident one day."






What should be shall be-The fellowship of the ring-

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2008-2018 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.